mulindahabi v republic of rwanda application no 0042017 2020 afchpr 58 26 june 2020

mulindahabi v republic of rwanda application no 0042017 2020 afchpr 58 26 june 2020

The Court found that the Applicant’s rights to a fair trial, equality before the law, and work were not violated, as the national courts duly considered his evidence, provided reasoned judgments, and applied the law without discrimination. The Applicant failed to prove any discriminatory treatment or that the dismissal was unlawful under the applicable law. No violation of Article 1 was established as no substantive right was found to be breached.

Citation
mulindahabi v republic of rwanda application no 0042017 2020 afchpr 58 26 june 2020
Parties
Applicant: Fidèle Mulindahabi; Respondent State: Republic of Rwanda
Court
TANZLII
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
26 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Human Rights Application / Final Judgment in Default
Outcome
Application dismissed in its entirety
Legal Topics
Right to Fair Trial, Right to Equality Before the Law, Right to Work, Judicial Impartiality, Exhaustion of Local Remedies
Source Language
English
Human Rights Law Labour Law Right to Fair Trial Right to Equality Before the Law Right to Work Judicial Impartiality Exhaustion of Local Remedies

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fidèle Mulindahabi

Applicant

Republic of Rwanda

Respondent State

Procedural Posture

Human Rights Application / Final Judgment in Default

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Applicant's right to a fair trial under Article 7(1) of the Charter was violated
  2. 2 Whether the Applicant's right to equality before the law and equal protection of the law under Article 3 of the Charter was violated
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant's right to work under Article 15 of the Charter and Article 6(1) of ICESCR was violated

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that the Applicant’s rights to a fair trial, equality before the law, and work were not violated, as the national courts duly considered his evidence, provided reasoned judgments, and applied the law without discrimination. The Applicant failed to prove any discriminatory treatment or that the dismissal was unlawful under the applicable law. No violation of Article 1 was established as no substantive right was found to be breached.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed in its entirety

Orders

  • Declares jurisdiction and admissibility
  • Finds no violation of Articles 1, 3, 7(1), or 15 of the Charter